Leung, H Curtiss [IT]:
> I'll grant there's a difference, but I'd say they're points
> along the same continuum.
But at what a distance!
> And neither the personal rage
> Reed might feel nor his likely incapacity for abstract
> thought excuse or even explain the *general* terms in
> which he puts his sentiments. As for Albright, who knows
> if she did or didn't feel an animus towards the innocents
> who died in Iraq? Adorno has it that if a lion had
> consciousness, the rage it feels towards its prey would
> be ideology; it's not hard to imagine that someone like
> Albright harboring a similar blind fury against her victims.
The lion doesn't feel rage toward its prey; it loves its prey, loves it to death. If it feels rage it's against other lions, or competitors like hyenas or humans. Lions are gentle, reasonable creatures compared to us. Speaking of whom, I see nothing of either love or rage in Albright or her war-criminal master, Clinton. Like McVeigh, the children they chose to kill were "collateral damage", expendably in the path of a cold, murderous will to power. McVeigh's error was being a bumpkin; he should have gone to Yale and Oxford and played the game -- then he could have killed people all over the world and possibly satisfied his thirst for this sort of entertainment. And later, instead of being given the death penalty he'd be given a cushy job, possibly at a prominent academic institution.
> Curtiss, still thinking _Songs for Drella_ is a great album, though.
True, but my favorite Reed work is _Metal_Machine_Music_, of which I used to have a secret bootleg tape -- but now it's merely $14.49 at CDNow and anyone can buy it. I thought being mean about poor Valerie was unworthy of Lou and detracted from _Drella_. Maybe he's sort of simple-minded.